Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Bush Administration's Media Manipulation--MediaGate? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Orcastraiter who wrote (788)	3/3/2005 8:44:15 PM
From: PartyTime	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 9838

Orch--I've been following this. Might even have started it--lol! Relative to your comment below: >>>I also explained to you in the original post and in a follow up post how heavy steel pieces would be flung up and out of the building.<<< I can understand how they'd be flung up. But how would they attain lateral positions?

To: Orcastraiter who wrote (788)	3/3/2005 9:09:50 PM
From: Raymond Duray	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 9838

orcastraitor, Re: You must have a reading comprehension problem. I have explained to you twice now how the falling building could cause beams to be flung. No, I think my reading ability is fine, and I've got Mensa membership to prove it. What I've got though is a bad attitude. When someone contradicts what I've personally experienced in 25 years of construction, i.e. flung beam fantasies, I do not intend to suffer fools politely. Please, for the sake of argument, grab anything heavy, such as a barbell and hold it over your foot. Introduce as much wind as you care to and drop the weight. Please don't ask me to pay the doctor bill, I'm going to be too busy laughing at your foolishness. *** Re: I also explained to you in the original post and in a follow up post how heavy steel pieces would be flung up and out of the building. That is incorrect. You asserted that beams would defy the laws of physics, but you demonstrated and proved nothing, other than how little you understand about physical reality.